Jason Murphy
The Heritage Foundation
Re "Steps to Undermine Muslim Extremism: The Saudi Angle" — James Phillips' comments on 9/11
Mr Phillips attribute's 9/11 to Saudi hijackers several of whom are alive according to the BBC, and the evidence shows that 19 Muslims could not have carried out the attacks of 9/11 without the help of elements within US.
I would be pleased to debate Mr Phillips on this issue.
As for Islamic extremism, how about beginning with US extremism, and setting an example for others?
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Wall Street reform missing vital ingredient
Pam Martens writes in CounterPunch: "Last Fall, it was all about the wall: financial bigwigs like former Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker, former Citigroup co-CEO John Reed, Governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, all espoused reestablishing the legal barrier between the derivatives casino that masquerades today as Wall Street and commercial banks holding insured deposits. . . .
"But the wall has now gone missing in the current financial reform bill".
"But the wall has now gone missing in the current financial reform bill".
Saturday, March 27, 2010
DOJ list of 'terrorism' convictions
Click on "National Security Division Statistics on Unsealed International Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Convictions 9/11/01 - 3/18/10" at bottom of page.
Iraq election: CIA connected Iyad Allawi wins narrowly
A secular coalition led by Iyad Allawi narrowly won the most seats in this month’s Iraq parliamentary elections.
Dr. Allawi was nominated to be Iraq's interim prime minister by Iraq's U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council on May 28, 2004.
In 1996, he worked with the CIA to plot a coup that was to involve Iraqi army generals toppling Hussein.
Dr. Allawi was nominated to be Iraq's interim prime minister by Iraq's U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council on May 28, 2004.
In 1996, he worked with the CIA to plot a coup that was to involve Iraqi army generals toppling Hussein.
Friday, March 26, 2010
US offers nuclear deal to Pakistan
The "US, according to analysts who spoke to Asia Times Online, wants Pakistan to walk away from the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project." In exchange, Pakistan — not a signatory to the NPT — would get US nuclear technology.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Staging Bin Laden’s 'death'
It appears that we are being primed for the "death" of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
Attorney General Eric Holder told a House panel this month that bin Laden "will never appear in an American courtroom."
Others who have examined “Bin Laden’s tapes” have concluded that Bin Laden is dead.
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that the US has had no reliable information on the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden in years.
But the US needs a neat ending to its war on Afghanistan.
Staging Bin Laden’s death will be seen as a fitting end to this genocidal war for the control of energy resources. Of course it will have to be done so that visual identification is not possible.
We suspect that when Bin Laden is “killed,” we’ll just have to trust the folks that lied us into war to confirm they got him.
Attorney General Eric Holder told a House panel this month that bin Laden "will never appear in an American courtroom."
Others who have examined “Bin Laden’s tapes” have concluded that Bin Laden is dead.
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that the US has had no reliable information on the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden in years.
But the US needs a neat ending to its war on Afghanistan.
Staging Bin Laden’s death will be seen as a fitting end to this genocidal war for the control of energy resources. Of course it will have to be done so that visual identification is not possible.
We suspect that when Bin Laden is “killed,” we’ll just have to trust the folks that lied us into war to confirm they got him.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Deformed babies: Victims of uranium munitions
There are reports of deformed babies being born in Afghanistan and Gaza — victims of uranium munitions used by the US and Israeli forces.
One in four Americans believe 9/11 was a fabrication and pretext for war
The following are the results of an Angus Reid poll:
Do you agree or disagree with this statement? – “The Sept. 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan.”
Result: 26% agree; 12% not sure; 62% disagree.
The commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11, 2001 concluded that an attack was carried out by 19 hijackers who were members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization, led by Osama bin Laden. Do you believe this is what actually happened on 9/11?
Result: 12% said no; 21% not sure; 67% said yes.
For those who do not agree with the first statement, or said yes to the second, we invite them to visit our website.
Do you agree or disagree with this statement? – “The Sept. 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan.”
Result: 26% agree; 12% not sure; 62% disagree.
The commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11, 2001 concluded that an attack was carried out by 19 hijackers who were members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization, led by Osama bin Laden. Do you believe this is what actually happened on 9/11?
Result: 12% said no; 21% not sure; 67% said yes.
For those who do not agree with the first statement, or said yes to the second, we invite them to visit our website.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Gordon Duff: Sabrosky interview ties Israel to 9/11
Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former director of studies at the US Army War College, says that the military brass now know that Israel and those traitors within our nation committed the 911 attack.
More on 9/11.
More on 9/11.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
How the West poisoned Bangladesh
The Independent (UK) reports: "Up to 20 million people in Bangladesh are at risk of suffering early deaths because of arsenic poisoning — the legacy of a well-intentioned but ill-planned water project that created a devastating public health catastrophe."
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Former cabinet minister on Britain's National Health Service
Tony Benn, former cabinet minister and the longest-serving MP in the history of the British Labour Party, on Britain's National Health Service:
It was set up in Britain in 1948, sixty-one years ago. And I have with me the statement made by the government at the time. “Your new National Health Service begins on the 5th of July. […] How do you get it?
“It will provide you with all medical, dental, and nursing care. Everyone—rich or poor, man, woman or child—can use it or any part of it. There are no charges, except for a few special items. There are no insurance qualifications. But it is not a ‘charity’. You are all paying for it, […] as taxpayers, and it will relieve your money worries in time of illness.”
It was set up in Britain in 1948, sixty-one years ago. And I have with me the statement made by the government at the time. “Your new National Health Service begins on the 5th of July. […] How do you get it?
“It will provide you with all medical, dental, and nursing care. Everyone—rich or poor, man, woman or child—can use it or any part of it. There are no charges, except for a few special items. There are no insurance qualifications. But it is not a ‘charity’. You are all paying for it, […] as taxpayers, and it will relieve your money worries in time of illness.”
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
What is terrorism?
Enver Masud, founder The Wisdom Fund, posted following at U.S. News & World Report:
In 2005, then UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, recognized this need, and called for a "universally accepted definition of terrorism, he endorsed the wording contained in the recent report from the UN High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, . . . The panel defined terrorism as any action intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organisation to do, or abstain from, any act."
Five years later, there's still no generally accepted definition of terrorism — presumably because it would include acts that major powers now commit with impunity.
The simple definition in Webster's New World Dictionary, Second College Edition, defines terrorism as the "use of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate, and subjugate, esp. such use as a political weapon or policy".
Given this definition of terrorism, together with the definition of "power politics" and "realpolitik", leads to the conclusion that frequently realpolitik equals, power politics, equals terrorism.
In 2005, then UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, recognized this need, and called for a "universally accepted definition of terrorism, he endorsed the wording contained in the recent report from the UN High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, . . . The panel defined terrorism as any action intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organisation to do, or abstain from, any act."
Five years later, there's still no generally accepted definition of terrorism — presumably because it would include acts that major powers now commit with impunity.
The simple definition in Webster's New World Dictionary, Second College Edition, defines terrorism as the "use of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate, and subjugate, esp. such use as a political weapon or policy".
Given this definition of terrorism, together with the definition of "power politics" and "realpolitik", leads to the conclusion that frequently realpolitik equals, power politics, equals terrorism.
Comments by David Ray Griffin at the Architects and Engineers press conference
A recently discovered paper on “Conspiracy Theories” by Obama appointee Cass Sunstein has rightly been receiving a lot of negative attention.
But this paper also makes an important contribution, pointing out that an idea cannot be rejected simply because it is a conspiracy theory, because there are true as well as false conspiracy theories.
We can decide between true and false theories, of course, only by seeing which ones are supported by the relevant evidence.
Sunstein says that the government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory – according to which there was a conspiracy between Osama bin Laden and 19 members of his al-Qaeda organization – is true, while that of the 9/11 Truth Movement is false. But he provides no evidence to support either claim.
The 9/11 Truth Movement, however, has presented an enormous amount of evidence to support its claims.
For example, in my 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7, I have shown that the report on this collapse put out by NIST – the National Institute of Standards and Technology – is unscientific and false.
It is unscientific because it can make its major negative claim – that the building was not brought down by explosives – only:
• by ignoring multiple testimonies about explosions going off in the building;
• by ignoring a piece of steel from the building that looked like a piece of Swiss cheese, even though fire could not have gotten anywhere close to the temperature needed to melt steel;
• by ignoring particles of metals in the dust that could have been produced only by extremely high temperatures;
• and by ignoring the existence of nanothermite, a high explosive.
The NIST report is also unscientific because it can make its major positive claim – that the building was brought down by fire – only by telling rather obvious lies:
• that a huge fire was burning on the 12th floor at 5:00 PM, even though its 2004 Interim Report had a photograph showing this fire to be completely burned out by 4:45;
• and that the building collapsed because its girders were not connected to the floor slabs with shear studs, even though that same 2004 report reported that the girders were connected with shear studs.
The NIST report is unscientific, finally, because it affirms a miracle, in the sense of a violation of basic principles of physics. Only months before NIST put out its final report, its lead investigator, Shyam Sunder, correctly stated that free fall would be physically impossible in a fire-produced collapse. But after high-school physics teacher David Chandler demonstrated in a YouTube presentation that the building came down in absolute free fall for over two seconds, NIST affirmed this empirical fact, while still maintaining its fire theory of the collapse. It thereby affirmed what it had previously acknowledged to be impossible. (All of these facts are contained in my latest book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 Is Unscientific and False.)
The government’s theory about the collapse of WTC 7 has, therefore, been disproved as thoroughly as a theory can be disproved. This is one of the reasons why 1,000 licensed architects and engineers are calling for a new investigation.
But this paper also makes an important contribution, pointing out that an idea cannot be rejected simply because it is a conspiracy theory, because there are true as well as false conspiracy theories.
We can decide between true and false theories, of course, only by seeing which ones are supported by the relevant evidence.
Sunstein says that the government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory – according to which there was a conspiracy between Osama bin Laden and 19 members of his al-Qaeda organization – is true, while that of the 9/11 Truth Movement is false. But he provides no evidence to support either claim.
The 9/11 Truth Movement, however, has presented an enormous amount of evidence to support its claims.
For example, in my 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7, I have shown that the report on this collapse put out by NIST – the National Institute of Standards and Technology – is unscientific and false.
It is unscientific because it can make its major negative claim – that the building was not brought down by explosives – only:
• by ignoring multiple testimonies about explosions going off in the building;
• by ignoring a piece of steel from the building that looked like a piece of Swiss cheese, even though fire could not have gotten anywhere close to the temperature needed to melt steel;
• by ignoring particles of metals in the dust that could have been produced only by extremely high temperatures;
• and by ignoring the existence of nanothermite, a high explosive.
The NIST report is also unscientific because it can make its major positive claim – that the building was brought down by fire – only by telling rather obvious lies:
• that a huge fire was burning on the 12th floor at 5:00 PM, even though its 2004 Interim Report had a photograph showing this fire to be completely burned out by 4:45;
• and that the building collapsed because its girders were not connected to the floor slabs with shear studs, even though that same 2004 report reported that the girders were connected with shear studs.
The NIST report is unscientific, finally, because it affirms a miracle, in the sense of a violation of basic principles of physics. Only months before NIST put out its final report, its lead investigator, Shyam Sunder, correctly stated that free fall would be physically impossible in a fire-produced collapse. But after high-school physics teacher David Chandler demonstrated in a YouTube presentation that the building came down in absolute free fall for over two seconds, NIST affirmed this empirical fact, while still maintaining its fire theory of the collapse. It thereby affirmed what it had previously acknowledged to be impossible. (All of these facts are contained in my latest book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 Is Unscientific and False.)
The government’s theory about the collapse of WTC 7 has, therefore, been disproved as thoroughly as a theory can be disproved. This is one of the reasons why 1,000 licensed architects and engineers are calling for a new investigation.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Monday, March 15, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Letter to Vice Chair, The 9/11 Commission: '9/11 Unveiled' shows that much of what we’ve been told about 9/11 is false
Mr. Lee Hamilton
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center
One Woodrow Wilson Plaza
1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20004-3027
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
"9/11 Unveiled" shows that much of what we’ve been told about that tragic day, September 11, 2001, is false.
You may download "9/11 Unveiled" free from http://www.twf.org/Library/911Unveiled.html, and read it in an hour — skip the first two sections to save time.
My varied work experience has taught me how to sift through complex, conflicting facts and opinions to arrive at defensible conclusions. I challenge the 9/11 Commission to defend theirs.
I managed the U.S. National Power Grid Study (directed a couple of dozen, multidisciplinary teams — a total of 150 persons), and the National Electric Reliability Study for the U.S. Department of Energy. I also set up and directed the Operations Review Division at the Iowa Commerce Commission. I’ve consulted for the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the World Bank — in Albania, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Indonesia, Latvia, Pakistan, Russia, and Tanzania.
I was recently on a three week lecture tour of South Africa speaking before hundreds every day, interviews on radio, and on television (broadcast to 20+ countries). Virtually all who listened came away sharing my conclusions. The U.S. embassy declined an invitation from SAfm to rebut me.
I live by the Pentagon, and would be pleased to give you a personal briefing.
Sincerely,
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center
One Woodrow Wilson Plaza
1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20004-3027
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
"9/11 Unveiled" shows that much of what we’ve been told about that tragic day, September 11, 2001, is false.
You may download "9/11 Unveiled" free from http://www.twf.org/Library/911Unveiled.html, and read it in an hour — skip the first two sections to save time.
My varied work experience has taught me how to sift through complex, conflicting facts and opinions to arrive at defensible conclusions. I challenge the 9/11 Commission to defend theirs.
I managed the U.S. National Power Grid Study (directed a couple of dozen, multidisciplinary teams — a total of 150 persons), and the National Electric Reliability Study for the U.S. Department of Energy. I also set up and directed the Operations Review Division at the Iowa Commerce Commission. I’ve consulted for the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the World Bank — in Albania, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Indonesia, Latvia, Pakistan, Russia, and Tanzania.
I was recently on a three week lecture tour of South Africa speaking before hundreds every day, interviews on radio, and on television (broadcast to 20+ countries). Virtually all who listened came away sharing my conclusions. The U.S. embassy declined an invitation from SAfm to rebut me.
I live by the Pentagon, and would be pleased to give you a personal briefing.
Sincerely,
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
Friday, March 12, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Huffington Post publishes, removes Jesse Ventura's 9/11 article
But the original is still available — for now.
Monday, March 8, 2010
A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy
Re Editorial, "A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy," Washington Post, March 8, 2010
If you believe it's a fantasy, why does the government refuse to answer the questions raised by more than 1000 architects and engineers, dozens of pilots, military and intelligence personnel, etc.?
During my 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa — http://www.twf.org/911.html — I spoke to hundreds daily, was on national radio, and was interviewed on a television show broadcast to more than 20 countries. Virtually no one disagreed with me that The 9/11 Commission Report was fatally flawed.
The US embassy declined to provide someone to rebut me, despite the fact that the radio station, SABC, waited over a week for them.
I managed a multidisciplinary team of 150 persons at the US Dept of Energy, have consulted for USAID and the World Bank, and do not put my reputation on the line lightly.
The official version of events is the fantasy.
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
TWF.org
If you believe it's a fantasy, why does the government refuse to answer the questions raised by more than 1000 architects and engineers, dozens of pilots, military and intelligence personnel, etc.?
During my 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa — http://www.twf.org/911.html — I spoke to hundreds daily, was on national radio, and was interviewed on a television show broadcast to more than 20 countries. Virtually no one disagreed with me that The 9/11 Commission Report was fatally flawed.
The US embassy declined to provide someone to rebut me, despite the fact that the radio station, SABC, waited over a week for them.
I managed a multidisciplinary team of 150 persons at the US Dept of Energy, have consulted for USAID and the World Bank, and do not put my reputation on the line lightly.
The official version of events is the fantasy.
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
TWF.org
Friday, March 5, 2010
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
How does Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri's anti-terror fatwa define terrorism?
Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri, a former Pakistani lawmaker, has issued a 600-page fatwa that bans suicide bombing "without any excuses, any pretexts, or exceptions."
In the past, we've raised a number of issues regarding suicide bombing, and commented on a previous fatwa on terrorism. The first issue is how does one define terrorism?
We did not find a definition in Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri's summary in English.
In the past, we've raised a number of issues regarding suicide bombing, and commented on a previous fatwa on terrorism. The first issue is how does one define terrorism?
We did not find a definition in Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri's summary in English.
Monday, March 1, 2010
New York Times story Iran worked on nuclear warhead 'is, quite simply, false'
Peter Casey, a Massachusetts lawyer, writes in Antiwar.com: "You do not need a degree in nuclear physics or chemical engineering to see that the New York Times story is, quite simply, false. . . .
"First, the story's lead attributes to the report statements of fact that the IAEA does not make — and has never made. Instead of stating that 'Iran Worked on Warhead,' the IAEA says that it is concerned about the possible existence of past or current activities related to the development of a nuclear payload. . . .
"Second, the report does not state or claim that the IAEA has any new information about the possibility of a nuclear weapons program. The report contains no relevant new or different facts, evidence, conclusions, or 'declarations.' On the contrary, the IAEA (at paragraph 40) is emphatic that it is summarizing information about potential military application previously reported in detail."
"First, the story's lead attributes to the report statements of fact that the IAEA does not make — and has never made. Instead of stating that 'Iran Worked on Warhead,' the IAEA says that it is concerned about the possible existence of past or current activities related to the development of a nuclear payload. . . .
"Second, the report does not state or claim that the IAEA has any new information about the possibility of a nuclear weapons program. The report contains no relevant new or different facts, evidence, conclusions, or 'declarations.' On the contrary, the IAEA (at paragraph 40) is emphatic that it is summarizing information about potential military application previously reported in detail."
Friday, February 26, 2010
Sibel Edmonds: The traitors among us
SIBEL EDMONDS, a former FBI translator, claims that the following government officials have committed what amount to acts of treason. They are lawmakers Dennis Hastert, Bob Livingston, Dan Burton, Roy Blunt, Stephen Solarz and Tom Lantos, as well as at least three members of George W. Bush’s inner circle: Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz and Marc Grossman. But is Sibel Edmonds credible?
“Absolutely, she’s credible,” Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told CBS’s 60 Minutes . . .
“Absolutely, she’s credible,” Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told CBS’s 60 Minutes . . .
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Engaging religious communities abroad
Dr. Rachel Bronson
Vice President, Programs and Studies
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs
I attended the presentation "Engaging Religious Communities Abroad: A New Imperative for U.S. Foreign Policy" at Georgetown University on Tuesday, and found an important element missing.
The missing element is how the other perceives the U.S. Of course USAID will find plenty of takers for their largesse, but unless one acknowledges the views of the other, and deals with them, it's likely to be a one way conversation.
I can cite many examples from history — from Indonesia, to the Philippines, and more recently Afghanistan and Iraq, but allow me to focus on one: 9/11.
The report takes the official version of 9/11 as a given. However, more than 1000 architects and engineers, and hundreds of pilots, military, intelligence, and scientific personnel disagree with the official version of September 11, 2001.
During my 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa — where I spoke to hundreds daily, and appeared on radio and television — I found little support for the official version of 9/11.
The disagreement is captured in a quarter-page advertisement that we placed in the Washington Times in the Obama inaugural issue, and in my letter to President Obama.
I would be pleased to discuss this further, and challenge anyone in the Obama administration to debate the issue.
Enver Masud
Chairman and CEO
The Wisdom Fund
Vice President, Programs and Studies
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs
I attended the presentation "Engaging Religious Communities Abroad: A New Imperative for U.S. Foreign Policy" at Georgetown University on Tuesday, and found an important element missing.
The missing element is how the other perceives the U.S. Of course USAID will find plenty of takers for their largesse, but unless one acknowledges the views of the other, and deals with them, it's likely to be a one way conversation.
I can cite many examples from history — from Indonesia, to the Philippines, and more recently Afghanistan and Iraq, but allow me to focus on one: 9/11.
The report takes the official version of 9/11 as a given. However, more than 1000 architects and engineers, and hundreds of pilots, military, intelligence, and scientific personnel disagree with the official version of September 11, 2001.
During my 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa — where I spoke to hundreds daily, and appeared on radio and television — I found little support for the official version of 9/11.
The disagreement is captured in a quarter-page advertisement that we placed in the Washington Times in the Obama inaugural issue, and in my letter to President Obama.
I would be pleased to discuss this further, and challenge anyone in the Obama administration to debate the issue.
Enver Masud
Chairman and CEO
The Wisdom Fund
9/11: Thank you Jennifer Harper, Washington Times
Ms Harper and The Washington Times, thank you for the "Explosive News."
For more on this story, see the quarter-page advertisement we placed in The Washington Times — Obama inaugural issue, our website, and in 9/11 Unveiled.
For more on this story, see the quarter-page advertisement we placed in The Washington Times — Obama inaugural issue, our website, and in 9/11 Unveiled.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
1,000 architects and engineers call for grand jury into 9/11!
1,000 architects and engineers call for grand jury into 9/11!
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The folks who lied us into war on Iraq, now trying to lie us into war on Iran
Are the folks who lied us into war on Iraq, to strip it of weapons it did not have, now trying to lie us into war on Iran, to strip it of weapons it does not have?
The evidence indicates they are.
The evidence indicates they are.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
What the Muslim world can teach us about nonviolence
"Gandhi's great colleague in the struggle for the freedom of Indian peoples from British colonial rule was Abdul-Ghaffar Khan, who developed his nonviolent understanding independently of Gandhi, through reading the Qur'an in jail. Abdul-Ghaffar Khan raised an army of 100,000 unarmed soldiers, the Khudai Khidmatgar, from the same villages that today yield many fewer young men up to the Taliban."
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Friday, February 5, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
NEW, 5th edition of 'The War on Islam' announced
In this fifth edition of The War on Islam, Enver Masud — recipient of the Human Rights Foundation, 2002 Gold Award — provides valuable insights on the conflict between Islam and the West, beginning with the Gulf War of 1991 to America’s recent financial debacle stemming (in part) from America’s unnecessary wars.
Impact International (England), in its review of The War on Islam, wrote, "Enver Masud gives example after example of disinformation and lies, cover-ups and double standards.” The All India Conference of Intellectuals wrote, "the contents of the book are an eye opener.” The U.S. based Muslim Observer wrote, "he brings balanced analysis of world affairs amidst the chaos of doctored evidence and complacent media.” Mumia Abu Jamal, “perhaps the best known death-row prisoner in the world", wrote, "his thoughts may prove valuable to thinking people in America”.
For those who seldom venture beyond mainstream news media, The War on Islam serves as a concise introduction to America's wars for resources and markets which are likely to escalate in the future. Since its first release in 2000, 10,000 copies of The War on Islam have been sold, and 190,000 downloaded. More on the book at The Wisdom Fund (TWF.org) — a nonprofit corporation founded by the author in 1995.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Dr. Aafia Siddiqui testifies at her trial
El-Hajj Mauri’ Saalakhan of the Peace and Justice Foundation, Maryland, reports from the courtroom in New York:
Aafia Siddiqui – a daughter, a sister, a mother of three, committed Muslim, social scientist, hafiz of Qur’an – needed to be heard. For years she had suffered in virtual silence…aching to be heard, to be understood, to have certain malicious untruths corrected and exposed for the lies they were.
That day finally came on Thursday, January 28, 2010!
The high drama of that day’s proceedings revolved around the question of whether or not U.S. District Judge Richard Berman would grant Aafia’s repeated demand to take the stand in her own defense.
Aafia’s lawyers appeared to be animate in their opposition to her taking the stand, while the prosecution appeared (on the surface) to be in favor of Aafia being entitled to her Fifth Amendment right. Her brother (Muhammad) was apprehensive about her taking the stand, leaning more in favor of her following the advice of her lawyers. Even Pakistani Ambassador Hussain Haqqani became involved. During a short visit he was allowed with the defendant, he reportedly advised Aafia to follow the advice of her lawyers. Aafia’s response to this collective concern was that she would make istiqara (a supplication to ALLAH Almighty for guidance on the matter); and in the end Aafia Siddiqui would be heard.
While I understood the reservations of those who were concerned about Aafia taking the stand (given all that she had already been through), I fully supported our sister’s right to be heard, and was guardedly optimistic about the potential outcome. More than anything, however, I knew that Aafia – like two young Muslim men in an Atlanta courtroom, and several young Muslim men in a New Jersey courtroom (who were eager, but manipulated into not taking the stand in their own defense not long ago) - needed to be heard! Aafia needed to have her day in court!
The process began with a preliminary (test) examination, with Aafia taking the witness stand in the absence of the jury – a kind of hearing within a hearing – to see how she would respond to that type of intensive and focused examination. After the judge determined that she was capable enough to enjoy her constitutional “right” to take the stand in her own defense, the jury was brought back into the courtroom, and it was on. (And what truly spectacular courtroom drama it turned out to be!)
The following summary is based on my notes from January 28th Open court proceedings began late in the morning, due to a number of procedural issues that needed to be addressed behind closed doors. Once proceedings began, it did so with the judge explaining Aafia’s right, and the possible risks, of her taking the stand. There was extensive discussion about the course and extent of cross examination should Aafia decide to testify. The government’s support of Aafia taking the stand was full of irony, given the fact that the government had repeatedly argued (during pre-trial and trial proceedings) that Aafia should not even be allowed to remain in the courtroom, because of her periodic outbursts and “uncontrollable” nature (in their view).
The First Witness
It was noted by the government that over a 12 day period, while Aafia was at the Craig Field Hospital at Bagram for critical care medical treatment, following her near fatal re-arrest in July 2008, two FBI agents had continuous access to the injured prisoner (a male and female who did not identify themselves to Aafia as FBI personnel).
FBI Special Agent Angela Sercer was the first to testify. She spoke about how she interrogated Aafia on a daily basis for the purpose of gathering “ intelligence.” She described how she sat with Aafia for an average of eight hours each day, and of how they discussed the shooting incident and other related matters (discussions she said Aafia would always initiate). Agent Sercer prepared written reports, and disclosed during testimony that Aafia was never Mirandized (i.e. informed of her rights to remain silent and consult with an attorney before questioning), nor did she have access to a Pakistani consular official.
According to Sercer, Aafia mostly enjoyed her discussions with this special agent. Sercer maintained that she treated Aafia with respect and did her best to respond to Aafia’s needs – i.e. when she requested food, water, bathroom access, or when she requested a Qur’an and a scarf, or when she would complain that the “soft restraints” were too tight and needed to be loosened, etc. Between 7/19/-8/4/08, FBI agents were posted inside and outside Aafia’s room 24 hours a day, ostensibly to insure that Aafia could not escape and to provide security for hospital personnel – despite the “soft restraints” which secured her hands and legs to the bed (in what Aafia later described as very uncomfortable positions) during her stay at this field hospital in Bagram.
The Second Witness
The second agent to testify was FBI Special Agent Bruce Kamerman, who had reportedly been assigned on 7/21/08. He claimed that Aafia made numerous statements, that she seemed lucid and to not be in much pain. He also insisted that there was never any coercion. He testified that Aafia had no visitors, and that no Afghan staff attended to her. He also claimed that there were occasions when Aafia would declare that her children were dead, and other times when she stated they might be living with her sister.
Following the testimony of the second agent, a hearing within the trial was held so that Aafia could give testimony (in the absence of the jury). Aafia testified that when she first realized she was in a hospital she had tubes everywhere. She was in a narcotic state resulting from the administration of powerful drugs (one or two she could remember by name, others she couldn’t). She recalled how her hands and feet were secured uncomfortably apart. She said the agents never identified themselves as FBI, except for “ Mr. Hurley.”
Aafia accused Agent Bruce Kamerman of subjecting her to “psychological torture.” She accused him of being immodest whenever he was present and medical personnel needed to examine her, and complained of how he would stand right outside the bathroom door whenever she needed to use it. She testified that Kamerman would sometimes come in the middle of the night (when he wasn’ t supposed to be there), and encourage the person assigned to take a break. Aafia said she remained in a sleep deprived state as a result of his frequent presence.
During this period she never had any contact with family, nor with any Pakistani authorities. She thought that [FBI Agent] “Angela was just a nice person.”
During the cross examination Aafia spoke about being “tortured in the secret prison,” and of how she kept asking about her children. She insisted that she never opined that they might be with her sister.
(I should note here that Aafia’s testimony was consistent with information contained on an audio CD that we’ve produced on the case. On the CD, former Bagram and Guantanamo prisoner Moazam Beg recounts how the un-identified female prisoner at Bagram, known only as Prisoner 650, was identified as a Pakistani national who appeared to be in her 30s, and as someone who had been torn away from her children and who didn’t know where they were.) Aafia also testified that she had multiple gunshot wounds; and that in addition to the gunshot wounds she had a debilitating back condition (resulting from being thrown on the floor after she was shot), persistent headaches, and an intubation tube. She also emphasized that she was in and out of consciousness; and, at times, mentally incoherent.
The video testimony of an Afghan security chief (by the name of Qadeer) was received by the court. While I had to briefly leave the court, and missed this testimony, it is my understanding that what Qadeer had to say about events at the Afghan National Police station in Ghazni – leading up to the shooting of Aafia - contradicted the testimony of a number of the government’ s main witnesses.
Later in the afternoon, when Aafia testified in front of the jury, the overflow courtroom (where I was seated) was full of observers. The majority appeared to be non-Muslims in professional attire - a probable mix of court and Justice Department personnel (including interns), law students, and a few journalists. I would estimate that roughly a quarter of the observers in this overflow courtroom were made up of solid Aafia supporters – and yet the reaction to the testimony at times was both interesting and edifying.
When I returned to the courtroom (about 10 minutes into Aafia’s testimony), she was describing her academic work leading up to the achievement of her PhD at Brandeis University. She testified that after completing her doctorate studies she taught in a school, and that her interest was in cultivating the capabilities of dyslexic and other special needs children. During this line of questioning, the monstrous image that the government had carefully crafted (with considerable support from mainstream media) of this petite young woman, had begun to be deconstructed. The real Dr. Aafia Siddiqui - the committed muslimah, the humanity-loving nurturer and educator, the gentle yet resolute mujahid for truth and justice - began to emerge with full force.
Testimony then proceeded to the events of July 17-18, 2008. Aafia testified that she remembered being concerned about the whereabouts of her missing children. She also remembered a press conference in an Afghan compound. She testified about being tied down to a bed until she vigorously protested, and was later untied and left behind a curtain. She later heard American and Afghan voices on the other side of the curtain, and concluded that they [Americans] wanted to return her to a “secret prison” again. She testified about how she had pleaded with the Afghans not to let the Americans take her away.
She testified about peaking through the curtain into the part of the room where Afghans and Americans were talking, and how when a startled American soldier noticed her, he jumped up and yelled that the prisoner had gotten loose, and shot her in the stomach. She described how she was also shot in the side by a second person. She also described how after falling back onto the bed in the room, she was violently thrown to the floor and lost consciousness.
She testified that she was in and out of consciousness, and vaguely recalled being placed on a stretcher, a helicopter, and receiving a blood transfusion – which she protested, drawing laughter in the courtroom when she recounted how she had “threatened to sue” her medical attendants if they gave her a blood transfusion. During this testimony, Aafia animatedly rejected the allegation that she picked up a [M-4] rifle and fired it (or that she even attempted to do so).
The Cross Examination
This is the time when every eye and every ear was riveted on the proceedings. It was the moment that Aafia’s defense attorneys, her brother, and a host of Muslim and non-Muslim supporters (seated within both courtrooms) dreaded. It was also the point in the proceedings that had the prosecution salivating for what opportunities would come there way – or so they thought! Cross examination began with Aafia revisiting the degrees that she received at MIT and Brandeis universities. She acknowledged that she took a required course in molecular biology; but emphasized that her work was in cognitive neuroscience. When questioned on whether she had ever done any work with chemicals, her response was, “only when required.”
(This opening line of questioning was significant for its prejudice producing potential in the minds of jurors. While Aafia is not being charged with any terrorism conspiracy counts, the threat of terrorism has been the pink elephant in the room throughout this troubling case!) The prosecutor attempted to draw a sinister correlation between Aafia and her [then] husband being questioned by the FBI in 2002, and leaving the U.S. a week later. Aafia noted that there wasn’t anything sinister about the timing; they had already planned to make that trip home before the FBI visit. To underscore this point, she noted how she later returned to the U.S. to attempt to find work in her field.
One of the most heart-wrenching moments in the cross-examination was when Aafia described how she was briefly re-united with a young boy in Ghazni (July 2008) who could have been her oldest son. She spoke of how she was mentally in a daze at that time, and had not seen any of her children in five years. As a result she could not definitively (than or now) determine if that was indeed her son, Ahmed.
When asked whether she had incriminating documents in her possession on the day she was arrested, Aafia testified that the bag in her possession on the day that she was re-detained was given to her. She didn’t know what was in the bag, nor could she definitively determine if the handwriting on some of the documents was hers or not. She also mentioned on a number of occasions (to the chagrin of the prosecutor) how she was repeatedly tortured by her captors at Bagram.
She was also questioned on whether she had taken a pistol course at a firing range while a student in Boston. Her initial reaction was that she did not have any recollection of taking such a course, and when pressed further, answered “No.” When the prosecutor continued to press the issue (infusing sinister motivations in the process), Aafia admonished the prosecutor in the strong, clear voice that was heard throughout her testimony: “You can’ t build a case on hate; you should build it on fact!” Aafia testified that all she was thinking about at the time of her re-arrest in Ghazni, was “getting out of that room and not being sent back to the secret prison.” While discussions were going on between the Afghans and Americans, Aafia was searching for a way out. She repeated her assertion that she startled one of the soldiers who hollered, “She’s free! - before shooting her.
Aafia also elicited an approving reaction in the courtroom when she opined, in reaction to the government’s narration of events, she could not believe a soldier would be so irresponsible as to leave his M4 rifle on the floor unsecured.
In response to government questioning she again took the opportunity to strongly rebuke Agent Kamerman, while rejecting most of his testimony revisited by the prosecutor.
Aafia spoke highly of a number of nurses (and a doctor) who took care of her at Bagram. There was one nurse in particular that Aafia promised to mention favorably if she ever wrote a book. She then produced laughter in the courtroom again when she stated, “Since I don’t think I’m going to write a book, I’m mentioning her now.”
One of the most powerful and revealing moments in the testimony was when she spoke about the people who systematically abused her in the “secret prison” – denouncing them as “fake Americans, not real Americans.” (Because of the way their actions both violated and damaged America’s image!) She spoke again, under cross examination, about the strong pain medication she was on, and some of the effects this medication had on her. Aafia also mentioned how she was instructed to translate and copy something from a book while she was secretly imprisoned. During the course of this testimony which repeatedly drew the ire of an increasingly frustrated prosecutor, Aafia noted how she can now understand how people can be framed (for crimes they are not guilty of).
At this point in the proceedings, the judge ordered a brief recess. Clearly the government had thought that they would be able to control and manipulate Aafia in manner that would work in their favor; this ended up being a MAJOR MISCALCULATION. The purpose of this break in the proceedings, in my humble opinion, was to allow the prosecutor to regain her composure, and consult with fellow prosecutors for a more effective line of attack. When testimony resumed, Aafia spoke of how she was often forced-fed information from one group of persons at the secret prison, and then made to regurgitate the same information before a different group of inquisitors. While it was presented to her as a type of “game,” she spoke of how she would be “punished” if she got something wrong.
On defense cross, Aafia was shown pictures and asked to identify herself in them. She reluctantly did so, but with a little levity, citing how unattractive and immodest the photos were. I could not see the photos from the overflow courtroom where I was sitting, but I assume that these were the photos of an un-covered, emaciated and emotionally disfigured Aafia Siddiqui - after her horrific ordeal at the hands of American terrorists.
A final note: I sincerely believe that Aafia Siddiqui’s time spent on the witness stand on January 28th was a cathartic experience for her – but one that the prosecution, in retrospect, now deeply regrets. For any truly objective and fair-minded person who witnessed that day’s proceedings, the U.S Government’s case against Aafia Siddiqui was exposed for what it always was… a horrific and profoundly tragic miscarriage of justice!
The struggle continues…
Aafia Siddiqui – a daughter, a sister, a mother of three, committed Muslim, social scientist, hafiz of Qur’an – needed to be heard. For years she had suffered in virtual silence…aching to be heard, to be understood, to have certain malicious untruths corrected and exposed for the lies they were.
That day finally came on Thursday, January 28, 2010!
The high drama of that day’s proceedings revolved around the question of whether or not U.S. District Judge Richard Berman would grant Aafia’s repeated demand to take the stand in her own defense.
Aafia’s lawyers appeared to be animate in their opposition to her taking the stand, while the prosecution appeared (on the surface) to be in favor of Aafia being entitled to her Fifth Amendment right. Her brother (Muhammad) was apprehensive about her taking the stand, leaning more in favor of her following the advice of her lawyers. Even Pakistani Ambassador Hussain Haqqani became involved. During a short visit he was allowed with the defendant, he reportedly advised Aafia to follow the advice of her lawyers. Aafia’s response to this collective concern was that she would make istiqara (a supplication to ALLAH Almighty for guidance on the matter); and in the end Aafia Siddiqui would be heard.
While I understood the reservations of those who were concerned about Aafia taking the stand (given all that she had already been through), I fully supported our sister’s right to be heard, and was guardedly optimistic about the potential outcome. More than anything, however, I knew that Aafia – like two young Muslim men in an Atlanta courtroom, and several young Muslim men in a New Jersey courtroom (who were eager, but manipulated into not taking the stand in their own defense not long ago) - needed to be heard! Aafia needed to have her day in court!
The process began with a preliminary (test) examination, with Aafia taking the witness stand in the absence of the jury – a kind of hearing within a hearing – to see how she would respond to that type of intensive and focused examination. After the judge determined that she was capable enough to enjoy her constitutional “right” to take the stand in her own defense, the jury was brought back into the courtroom, and it was on. (And what truly spectacular courtroom drama it turned out to be!)
The following summary is based on my notes from January 28th Open court proceedings began late in the morning, due to a number of procedural issues that needed to be addressed behind closed doors. Once proceedings began, it did so with the judge explaining Aafia’s right, and the possible risks, of her taking the stand. There was extensive discussion about the course and extent of cross examination should Aafia decide to testify. The government’s support of Aafia taking the stand was full of irony, given the fact that the government had repeatedly argued (during pre-trial and trial proceedings) that Aafia should not even be allowed to remain in the courtroom, because of her periodic outbursts and “uncontrollable” nature (in their view).
The First Witness
It was noted by the government that over a 12 day period, while Aafia was at the Craig Field Hospital at Bagram for critical care medical treatment, following her near fatal re-arrest in July 2008, two FBI agents had continuous access to the injured prisoner (a male and female who did not identify themselves to Aafia as FBI personnel).
FBI Special Agent Angela Sercer was the first to testify. She spoke about how she interrogated Aafia on a daily basis for the purpose of gathering “ intelligence.” She described how she sat with Aafia for an average of eight hours each day, and of how they discussed the shooting incident and other related matters (discussions she said Aafia would always initiate). Agent Sercer prepared written reports, and disclosed during testimony that Aafia was never Mirandized (i.e. informed of her rights to remain silent and consult with an attorney before questioning), nor did she have access to a Pakistani consular official.
According to Sercer, Aafia mostly enjoyed her discussions with this special agent. Sercer maintained that she treated Aafia with respect and did her best to respond to Aafia’s needs – i.e. when she requested food, water, bathroom access, or when she requested a Qur’an and a scarf, or when she would complain that the “soft restraints” were too tight and needed to be loosened, etc. Between 7/19/-8/4/08, FBI agents were posted inside and outside Aafia’s room 24 hours a day, ostensibly to insure that Aafia could not escape and to provide security for hospital personnel – despite the “soft restraints” which secured her hands and legs to the bed (in what Aafia later described as very uncomfortable positions) during her stay at this field hospital in Bagram.
The Second Witness
The second agent to testify was FBI Special Agent Bruce Kamerman, who had reportedly been assigned on 7/21/08. He claimed that Aafia made numerous statements, that she seemed lucid and to not be in much pain. He also insisted that there was never any coercion. He testified that Aafia had no visitors, and that no Afghan staff attended to her. He also claimed that there were occasions when Aafia would declare that her children were dead, and other times when she stated they might be living with her sister.
Following the testimony of the second agent, a hearing within the trial was held so that Aafia could give testimony (in the absence of the jury). Aafia testified that when she first realized she was in a hospital she had tubes everywhere. She was in a narcotic state resulting from the administration of powerful drugs (one or two she could remember by name, others she couldn’t). She recalled how her hands and feet were secured uncomfortably apart. She said the agents never identified themselves as FBI, except for “ Mr. Hurley.”
Aafia accused Agent Bruce Kamerman of subjecting her to “psychological torture.” She accused him of being immodest whenever he was present and medical personnel needed to examine her, and complained of how he would stand right outside the bathroom door whenever she needed to use it. She testified that Kamerman would sometimes come in the middle of the night (when he wasn’ t supposed to be there), and encourage the person assigned to take a break. Aafia said she remained in a sleep deprived state as a result of his frequent presence.
During this period she never had any contact with family, nor with any Pakistani authorities. She thought that [FBI Agent] “Angela was just a nice person.”
During the cross examination Aafia spoke about being “tortured in the secret prison,” and of how she kept asking about her children. She insisted that she never opined that they might be with her sister.
(I should note here that Aafia’s testimony was consistent with information contained on an audio CD that we’ve produced on the case. On the CD, former Bagram and Guantanamo prisoner Moazam Beg recounts how the un-identified female prisoner at Bagram, known only as Prisoner 650, was identified as a Pakistani national who appeared to be in her 30s, and as someone who had been torn away from her children and who didn’t know where they were.) Aafia also testified that she had multiple gunshot wounds; and that in addition to the gunshot wounds she had a debilitating back condition (resulting from being thrown on the floor after she was shot), persistent headaches, and an intubation tube. She also emphasized that she was in and out of consciousness; and, at times, mentally incoherent.
The video testimony of an Afghan security chief (by the name of Qadeer) was received by the court. While I had to briefly leave the court, and missed this testimony, it is my understanding that what Qadeer had to say about events at the Afghan National Police station in Ghazni – leading up to the shooting of Aafia - contradicted the testimony of a number of the government’ s main witnesses.
Later in the afternoon, when Aafia testified in front of the jury, the overflow courtroom (where I was seated) was full of observers. The majority appeared to be non-Muslims in professional attire - a probable mix of court and Justice Department personnel (including interns), law students, and a few journalists. I would estimate that roughly a quarter of the observers in this overflow courtroom were made up of solid Aafia supporters – and yet the reaction to the testimony at times was both interesting and edifying.
When I returned to the courtroom (about 10 minutes into Aafia’s testimony), she was describing her academic work leading up to the achievement of her PhD at Brandeis University. She testified that after completing her doctorate studies she taught in a school, and that her interest was in cultivating the capabilities of dyslexic and other special needs children. During this line of questioning, the monstrous image that the government had carefully crafted (with considerable support from mainstream media) of this petite young woman, had begun to be deconstructed. The real Dr. Aafia Siddiqui - the committed muslimah, the humanity-loving nurturer and educator, the gentle yet resolute mujahid for truth and justice - began to emerge with full force.
Testimony then proceeded to the events of July 17-18, 2008. Aafia testified that she remembered being concerned about the whereabouts of her missing children. She also remembered a press conference in an Afghan compound. She testified about being tied down to a bed until she vigorously protested, and was later untied and left behind a curtain. She later heard American and Afghan voices on the other side of the curtain, and concluded that they [Americans] wanted to return her to a “secret prison” again. She testified about how she had pleaded with the Afghans not to let the Americans take her away.
She testified about peaking through the curtain into the part of the room where Afghans and Americans were talking, and how when a startled American soldier noticed her, he jumped up and yelled that the prisoner had gotten loose, and shot her in the stomach. She described how she was also shot in the side by a second person. She also described how after falling back onto the bed in the room, she was violently thrown to the floor and lost consciousness.
She testified that she was in and out of consciousness, and vaguely recalled being placed on a stretcher, a helicopter, and receiving a blood transfusion – which she protested, drawing laughter in the courtroom when she recounted how she had “threatened to sue” her medical attendants if they gave her a blood transfusion. During this testimony, Aafia animatedly rejected the allegation that she picked up a [M-4] rifle and fired it (or that she even attempted to do so).
The Cross Examination
This is the time when every eye and every ear was riveted on the proceedings. It was the moment that Aafia’s defense attorneys, her brother, and a host of Muslim and non-Muslim supporters (seated within both courtrooms) dreaded. It was also the point in the proceedings that had the prosecution salivating for what opportunities would come there way – or so they thought! Cross examination began with Aafia revisiting the degrees that she received at MIT and Brandeis universities. She acknowledged that she took a required course in molecular biology; but emphasized that her work was in cognitive neuroscience. When questioned on whether she had ever done any work with chemicals, her response was, “only when required.”
(This opening line of questioning was significant for its prejudice producing potential in the minds of jurors. While Aafia is not being charged with any terrorism conspiracy counts, the threat of terrorism has been the pink elephant in the room throughout this troubling case!) The prosecutor attempted to draw a sinister correlation between Aafia and her [then] husband being questioned by the FBI in 2002, and leaving the U.S. a week later. Aafia noted that there wasn’t anything sinister about the timing; they had already planned to make that trip home before the FBI visit. To underscore this point, she noted how she later returned to the U.S. to attempt to find work in her field.
One of the most heart-wrenching moments in the cross-examination was when Aafia described how she was briefly re-united with a young boy in Ghazni (July 2008) who could have been her oldest son. She spoke of how she was mentally in a daze at that time, and had not seen any of her children in five years. As a result she could not definitively (than or now) determine if that was indeed her son, Ahmed.
When asked whether she had incriminating documents in her possession on the day she was arrested, Aafia testified that the bag in her possession on the day that she was re-detained was given to her. She didn’t know what was in the bag, nor could she definitively determine if the handwriting on some of the documents was hers or not. She also mentioned on a number of occasions (to the chagrin of the prosecutor) how she was repeatedly tortured by her captors at Bagram.
She was also questioned on whether she had taken a pistol course at a firing range while a student in Boston. Her initial reaction was that she did not have any recollection of taking such a course, and when pressed further, answered “No.” When the prosecutor continued to press the issue (infusing sinister motivations in the process), Aafia admonished the prosecutor in the strong, clear voice that was heard throughout her testimony: “You can’ t build a case on hate; you should build it on fact!” Aafia testified that all she was thinking about at the time of her re-arrest in Ghazni, was “getting out of that room and not being sent back to the secret prison.” While discussions were going on between the Afghans and Americans, Aafia was searching for a way out. She repeated her assertion that she startled one of the soldiers who hollered, “She’s free! - before shooting her.
Aafia also elicited an approving reaction in the courtroom when she opined, in reaction to the government’s narration of events, she could not believe a soldier would be so irresponsible as to leave his M4 rifle on the floor unsecured.
In response to government questioning she again took the opportunity to strongly rebuke Agent Kamerman, while rejecting most of his testimony revisited by the prosecutor.
Aafia spoke highly of a number of nurses (and a doctor) who took care of her at Bagram. There was one nurse in particular that Aafia promised to mention favorably if she ever wrote a book. She then produced laughter in the courtroom again when she stated, “Since I don’t think I’m going to write a book, I’m mentioning her now.”
One of the most powerful and revealing moments in the testimony was when she spoke about the people who systematically abused her in the “secret prison” – denouncing them as “fake Americans, not real Americans.” (Because of the way their actions both violated and damaged America’s image!) She spoke again, under cross examination, about the strong pain medication she was on, and some of the effects this medication had on her. Aafia also mentioned how she was instructed to translate and copy something from a book while she was secretly imprisoned. During the course of this testimony which repeatedly drew the ire of an increasingly frustrated prosecutor, Aafia noted how she can now understand how people can be framed (for crimes they are not guilty of).
At this point in the proceedings, the judge ordered a brief recess. Clearly the government had thought that they would be able to control and manipulate Aafia in manner that would work in their favor; this ended up being a MAJOR MISCALCULATION. The purpose of this break in the proceedings, in my humble opinion, was to allow the prosecutor to regain her composure, and consult with fellow prosecutors for a more effective line of attack. When testimony resumed, Aafia spoke of how she was often forced-fed information from one group of persons at the secret prison, and then made to regurgitate the same information before a different group of inquisitors. While it was presented to her as a type of “game,” she spoke of how she would be “punished” if she got something wrong.
On defense cross, Aafia was shown pictures and asked to identify herself in them. She reluctantly did so, but with a little levity, citing how unattractive and immodest the photos were. I could not see the photos from the overflow courtroom where I was sitting, but I assume that these were the photos of an un-covered, emaciated and emotionally disfigured Aafia Siddiqui - after her horrific ordeal at the hands of American terrorists.
A final note: I sincerely believe that Aafia Siddiqui’s time spent on the witness stand on January 28th was a cathartic experience for her – but one that the prosecution, in retrospect, now deeply regrets. For any truly objective and fair-minded person who witnessed that day’s proceedings, the U.S Government’s case against Aafia Siddiqui was exposed for what it always was… a horrific and profoundly tragic miscarriage of justice!
The struggle continues…
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Democracy in America is a useful fiction
Chris Hedges writes: "Corporate forces, long before the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, carried out a coup d'etat in slow motion. The coup is over. We lost. The ruling is one more judicial effort to streamline mechanisms for corporate control. It exposes the myth of a functioning democracy and the triumph of corporate power. . . .
"Corporations have 35,000 lobbyists in Washington and thousands more in state capitals that dole out corporate money to shape and write legislation. . . .
"Our transformation into an empire, as happened in ancient Athens and Rome, has seen the tyranny we practice abroad become the tyranny we practice at home."
"Corporations have 35,000 lobbyists in Washington and thousands more in state capitals that dole out corporate money to shape and write legislation. . . .
"Our transformation into an empire, as happened in ancient Athens and Rome, has seen the tyranny we practice abroad become the tyranny we practice at home."
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Next generation iPod Touch?
Add built-in speakers, microphone, and a SIM card tray to the iPod Touch. With AT&T's $15 a month plan, I would buy it today.
Holocaust remembrance is a boon for Israeli propaganda
Gideon Levy of Haaretz (Israel) writes: Wednesday was International Holocaust Remembrance Day, and an Israeli public relations drive like this hasn't been seen for ages. The timing of the unusual effort - never have so many ministers deployed across the globe — is not coincidental: When the world is talking Goldstone, we talk Holocaust, as if out to blur the impression. When the world talks occupation, we'll talk Iran as if we wanted them to forget.
The kidnapping of Haiti
Oil was found in Haiti's waters decades ago and the US has kept it in reserve until the Middle East begins to run dry. More urgently, an occupied Haiti has a strategic importance in Washington's "rollback" plans for Latin America. The goal is the overthrow of the popular democracies in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, control of Venezuela's abundant petroleum reserves, and sabotage of the growing regional co-operation long denied by US-sponsored regimes.
More
More
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Aafia Siddiqi trial a 'travesty': foreign media denied full access
Mauri Saalakhan, of the Peace & Justice Foundation, reports: What I witnessed in yesterday's proceeding was a TRAVESTY! Midway into the morning's proceedings, Dr. Aafia Siddiqui was removed from the courtroom due to her inability to remain quiet while being assaulted from the witness stand by what she asserts are a battery of "lies."
Yesterday's real travesty, however, centered around the physical manipulation of the courtroom itself, and the shameful treatment accorded certain media representatives (esp. foreign media) who were denied the usual protocol normally afforded media personnel; simply because they failed to secure a special media pass during the pretrial hearings — a requirement they had no knowledge of.
Another appalling manipulation at yesterday's proceeding revolved around TWO OVERFLOW COURTROOMS PACKED WITH AAFIA SUPPORTERS and non-favored media reps (esp. Pakistani journalists), while EMPTY SEATS REMAINED IN THE MAIN COURTROOM! I was in one of the overflow courtrooms in the morning, and in the main courtroom in the afternoon. I noted that in the main courtroom the whole left side of the room had rows of empty seats marked "reserved," while folks outside the door were still being directed to one of the overflow courtrooms with the stated lie "There's no room left!"
Yesterday's real travesty, however, centered around the physical manipulation of the courtroom itself, and the shameful treatment accorded certain media representatives (esp. foreign media) who were denied the usual protocol normally afforded media personnel; simply because they failed to secure a special media pass during the pretrial hearings — a requirement they had no knowledge of.
Another appalling manipulation at yesterday's proceeding revolved around TWO OVERFLOW COURTROOMS PACKED WITH AAFIA SUPPORTERS and non-favored media reps (esp. Pakistani journalists), while EMPTY SEATS REMAINED IN THE MAIN COURTROOM! I was in one of the overflow courtrooms in the morning, and in the main courtroom in the afternoon. I noted that in the main courtroom the whole left side of the room had rows of empty seats marked "reserved," while folks outside the door were still being directed to one of the overflow courtrooms with the stated lie "There's no room left!"
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
What is Haiti owed?
Haiti's vulnerability to natural disasters, its food shortages, poverty, deforestation and lack of infrastructure, are not accidental. To say that it is the poorest nation in the Western hemisphere is to miss the point; Haiti was made poor — by France, the United States, Great Britain, other Western powers and by the IMF and the World Bank.
Straw's leaked letter to Blair on Iraq
"A legal justification is a necessary but far from sufficient pre-condition for military action. We have also to answer the big question – what will this action achieve? There seems to be a larger hole in this than on anything. Most of the assessments from the US have assumed regime change as a means of eliminating Iraq's WMD threat. But none has satisfactorily answered how that regime change is to be secured, and how there can be any certainty that the replacement regime will be better."
Friday, January 15, 2010
Ft Hood: How did shooter get 'ammunition available ONLY to our special operations troops'
. . . when Dr. Hasan went on his terror campaign at Ft. Hood using an FN Herstal 5.7mm 20 round assault pistol with classified ammunition available ONLY to our special operations troops, ammo specially designed for penetrating body armor, newspapers, TV, everyone was silent.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Sunday, January 10, 2010
'US-Israeli complicity in terror plots exposed"
Evidence is mounting of U.S. and Israeli complicity in this latest plot. The father Alhaji Umaru Abdul Mutallab of the young terrorist, is an accomplished Nigerian banker and ran the national arms industry (DICON) in patnership with Israel, Nigeria has extensive intelligence links to Israel.
MORE
MORE
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
170,000 Muslims were fingerprinted and interviewed — not one produced a terrorism conviction
Gary Younge of the Guardian (UK) writes: In the immediate aftermath of 9/11 the US government undertook the "preventative detention" of about 5,000 men on the basis of their birthplace and later sought a further 19,000 "voluntary interviews". Over the next year, more than 170,000 men from 24 predominantly Muslim countries and North Korea were fingerprinted and interviewed in a programme of "special registration". None of these produced a single terrorism conviction.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Monday, December 28, 2009
Flight 253 passenger: 'Sharp-dressed man aided terror suspect Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab onto plane without passport'
A Michigan man who was aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 says he witnessed Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab trying to board the plane in Amsterdam without a passport.
Editor: Re Kurt Haskell's boarding pass for NWA Flight 253, isn't this the part that is collected at boarding? How is it that Haskell still has it?
Editor: Re Kurt Haskell's boarding pass for NWA Flight 253, isn't this the part that is collected at boarding? How is it that Haskell still has it?
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
An Islamic view of terrorism
Yousuf Baadarani was born in Beirut in 1939. A writer on issues related to human nature and widely considered as an Islamist ideologue, he has written many books on the themes of ideology, conflict and Islam. These include European hatred of Islam: A plot in its second millennium; Christianity; A Roman political scheme; and 9/11 & Hijacking the World: An American plan.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Doctor admits Israeli pathologists harvested organs without consent
Israel has admitted pathologists harvested organs from dead Palestinians, and others, without the consent of their families — a practice it said ended in the 1990s . . .
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Saturday, December 19, 2009
121,000 contractors in Afghanistan, may grow to 220,000
At present, there are 104,000 Department of Defense contractors in Afghanistan. According to a report this week from the Congressional Research Service, as a result of the coming surge of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan, there may be up to 56,000 additional contractors deployed. But here is another group of contractors that often goes unmentioned: 3,600 State Department contractors and 14,000 USAID contractors. That means that the current total US force in Afghanistan is approximately 189,000 personnel (68,000 US troops and 121,000 contractors). And remember, that’s right now. And that, according to McCaskill, is a conservative estimate. A year from now, we will likely see more than 220,000 US-funded personnel on the ground in Afghanistan.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Sanctioning Iran a dangerous, illegal move
Rep. Ron Paul: Article V of the NPT states clearly that, "[n]othing in this treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the parties to the treaty to develop research, production, and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with articles I and II of this treaty." As Iran has never been found in violation of the NPT - has never been found to have diverted nuclear materials for non-peaceful purposes - this legislation seeking to deny Iran the right to enrichment even for peaceful purposes itself violates the NPT.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Behind the veil: Why Islam's most visible symbol is spreading
GENERALLY, ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS cite two verses in the Koran to support their consensus that Muslim women must, or should, cover their hair. The first is Verse 33:59, addressed to the prophet Muhammad and his family: “O Prophet! Tell Thy wives and daughters And the believing women, That they should cast Their outer garments over Their persons (when abroad): That is most convenient, That they should be known (As such) and not molested.” Verse 24:31 states, “And say to the believing women That they should lower Their gaze and guard Their modesty; that they Should not display their Beauty and ornaments except What (must ordinarily) appear Thereof; that they should Draw their veils over Their bosoms.”
But, writes sociologist Ashraf Zahedi, a scholar in residence at the University of California, Berkeley Beatrice Bain Research Group, “[T]hese citations emphasize modesty and covering the bosom and neck. There is no reference to covering female hair or to the head veil.”
But, writes sociologist Ashraf Zahedi, a scholar in residence at the University of California, Berkeley Beatrice Bain Research Group, “[T]hese citations emphasize modesty and covering the bosom and neck. There is no reference to covering female hair or to the head veil.”
Thursday, December 10, 2009
9/11 conspiracy: Jesse Ventura drops bombshell on truTV
Former Minnesota Governor, Jesse Ventura, dropped a bombshell on truTV last night. A witness on the show claimed that "ground control knew the hijackers were in the cockpit before the jets took off."
Mike Bellone — a volunteer firefighter on September 11, 2001 — claims that he saw one of the black boxes being taken away by the FBI, and his coworkers saw two others.
Fire due to a thermite based "paint" was used to demonstrate a plausible method of weakening the steel in the World Trade Center. Evidence from the World Trade Center is stored at JFK Hangar 17.
Let's keep all this in perspective. These are unverified claims.
Mike Bellone — a volunteer firefighter on September 11, 2001 — claims that he saw one of the black boxes being taken away by the FBI, and his coworkers saw two others.
Fire due to a thermite based "paint" was used to demonstrate a plausible method of weakening the steel in the World Trade Center. Evidence from the World Trade Center is stored at JFK Hangar 17.
Let's keep all this in perspective. These are unverified claims.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
9/11: Did the Solicitor General lie about receiving phone calls from his wife Barbara Olson?
Andrew Alexander
Ombudsman
The Washington Post
Dear Mr. Alexander:
RE: On Flight 77: 'Our Plane Is Being Hijacked'
By Marc Fisher and Don Phillips
September 12, 2001; Page A01
According to the Washington Post, Barbara K. Olson called her husband twice on September 11, 2001 in the final minutes of Flight 77. Her last words to him were, "What do I tell the pilot to do?"
"She called from the plane while it was being hijacked," said Theodore Olson — 42nd Solicitor General of the United States. "I wish it wasn't so, but it is."
However, prosecution exhibit P200054 (attached) in United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui shows that Barbara Olson made only one phone call — it did not connect, and it lasted for 0 seconds!
Both accounts of Barbara Olson's phone calls — the Solicitor General's and the prosecution's in United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui — cannot be correct.
This is not a trivial issue.
The Solicitor General's account of this phone call was picked up by major news media around the world, it helped define the narrative of September 11, 2001, was repeated in "The 9/11 Commission Report" (page 9), and it could impact the trial of the alleged 9/11 "mastermind" Khaled Sheikh Mohammed.
The Post owes its readers a correction of the record of this historic, tragic day.
Sincerely,
Enver Masud
Founder and CEO
The Wisdom Fund
www.twf.org
xxxx Hayes Street
Arlington, VA 22202
Phone: 703-521-xxxx
Ombudsman
The Washington Post
Dear Mr. Alexander:
RE: On Flight 77: 'Our Plane Is Being Hijacked'
By Marc Fisher and Don Phillips
September 12, 2001; Page A01
According to the Washington Post, Barbara K. Olson called her husband twice on September 11, 2001 in the final minutes of Flight 77. Her last words to him were, "What do I tell the pilot to do?"
"She called from the plane while it was being hijacked," said Theodore Olson — 42nd Solicitor General of the United States. "I wish it wasn't so, but it is."
However, prosecution exhibit P200054 (attached) in United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui shows that Barbara Olson made only one phone call — it did not connect, and it lasted for 0 seconds!
Both accounts of Barbara Olson's phone calls — the Solicitor General's and the prosecution's in United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui — cannot be correct.
This is not a trivial issue.
The Solicitor General's account of this phone call was picked up by major news media around the world, it helped define the narrative of September 11, 2001, was repeated in "The 9/11 Commission Report" (page 9), and it could impact the trial of the alleged 9/11 "mastermind" Khaled Sheikh Mohammed.
The Post owes its readers a correction of the record of this historic, tragic day.
Sincerely,
Enver Masud
Founder and CEO
The Wisdom Fund
www.twf.org
xxxx Hayes Street
Arlington, VA 22202
Phone: 703-521-xxxx
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
9/11 'mastermind': dim prospect for a fair trial
The prospect of a fair trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) appears dim. President Obama pledged that the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks will receive a fair trial, but later he seemed to contradict himself.
Scott Fenstermaker, the 9/11 lawyer, speaks out
"The government wants to control who represents the detainees. The government not only wants to, but it is. The government does this by controlling the judges. The judges are doing exactly what the government wants them to do in these cases. The judges ask what the government wants them to do, and then they do it."
Dubai: India may hold whip hand in this power game
Dubai may soon find itself a satellite not of its Abu Dhabi capital but of India. The biggest merchants in Dubai are Indian — they run the gold market, even the bookshops in Sheikh Mohamed's playpen — and west India is only two hours' flying time away. In fact, until 1962 — and you have to be an oldie to understand the emirates' economic world — the Indian rupee was the currency for most of the Gulf, including even Kuwait.
Dubai: A morally bankrupt dictatorship built by slave labor
Dubai is finally financially bankrupt — but it has been morally bankrupt all along. The idea that Dubai is an oasis of freedom on the Arabian peninsular is one of the great lies of our time.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
The mystery of Dr Aafia Siddiqui
The prosecution is but the latest twist in one of the most intriguing episodes of America's "war on terror". At its heart is the MIT-educated Siddiqui, once declared the world's most wanted woman. In 2003 she mysteriously vanished for five years, during which time she was variously dubbed the "Mata Hari of al-Qaida" or the "Grey Lady of Bagram", an iconic victim of American brutality.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Blackwater's secret war in Pakistan
At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, "snatch and grabs" of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, . . .
The memory scrub about why Ft. Hood happened is almost complete
That Maj. Hasan tried to get a military discharge before the massacre is largely being erased -- we're supposed to keep focusing on the Muslim part.
Monday, November 23, 2009
9/11: Former Governor Jesse Ventura's TV show 'Conspiracy Theory' starts December 2
Jesse Ventura is an outspoken advocate for the 9/11 Truth" movement. His new show, "Conspiracy Theory," starts December 2 on truTV — channel 246 on DirecTV, and available on the Internet.
Mr. Ventura won the Minnesota gubernatorial election of 1998. Running as an Independent and member of the Reform Party, he was elected the 38th Governor of Minnesota and served from January 4, 1999 to January 6, 2003 without seeking a second term.
On the Opie and Anthony Show to promote his new book "Don't Start the Revolution Without Me!", the conversation eventually turned to 9/11 — watch it now.
MORE on 9/11 at The Wisdom Fund
Mr. Ventura won the Minnesota gubernatorial election of 1998. Running as an Independent and member of the Reform Party, he was elected the 38th Governor of Minnesota and served from January 4, 1999 to January 6, 2003 without seeking a second term.
On the Opie and Anthony Show to promote his new book "Don't Start the Revolution Without Me!", the conversation eventually turned to 9/11 — watch it now.
MORE on 9/11 at The Wisdom Fund
India uproar over Ayodhya report
India's main opposition BJP has reacted angrily to reports that its leaders are implicated in an inquiry into the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid mosque. . . .
Some 2,000 people died in riots across India after the mosque was demolished. . . .
Led by former high court judge MS Liberhan, the inquiry took 17 years to complete its work, . . .
Some 2,000 people died in riots across India after the mosque was demolished. . . .
Led by former high court judge MS Liberhan, the inquiry took 17 years to complete its work, . . .
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Flight 77: FBI exhibit contradicts Solicitor General's account of Barbara Olson's phone calls on 9/11
According to Marc Fisher and Don Phillips of the Washington Post, Barbara K. Olson called her husband twice in the final minutes. Her last words to him were, "What do I tell the pilot to do?"
"She called from the plane while it was being hijacked," said Theodore Olson — 42nd Solicitor General of the United States. "I wish it wasn't so, but it is."
"The two conversations each lasted about a minute, said Tim O'Brien, a CNN reporter and friend of the Olsons."
However, FBI exhibit P200054 from the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui contradicts the Solicitor General's account. It shows that Barbara Olson made only one phone call — it did not connect, and it lasted for 0 seconds.
Mr. Olson's account appeared on the front page of the Washington Post on September 12, 2001, and is repeated in The 9/11 Commission Report.
We've contacted Mr. Olson (tolson@gibsondunn.com) for comments.
Monday, November 16, 2009
CIA says it gets its money's worth from Pakistani spy agency
It has given hundreds of millions to the ISI, for operations as well as rewards for the capture or death of terrorist suspects. Despite fears of corruption, it is money well-spent, ex-officials say.
Don't blame God for terrorism
After the Fort Hood massacre and others, some people — often atheist stalwarts — like to point at the corrosive influence of religion. But a closer look suggests that the most notorious killers usually act on secular motives.
Ex-Islamic radicals on what motivates — and impedes — extremism
The British journalist Johann Hari has written an absolutely vital article for The Independent, examining a growing movement of former hardened Islamic militants who are now devoted to teaching a more moderate and less fundamentalist Islam. Hari focuses on understanding what motivates some Muslims to turn to radicalism and terrorism in the first place, and how that process can be reversed. Though these ex-militants have very diverse backgrounds, they all stress two critical facts: (1) the more the foreign policy of the West is seen as aggressive, violent and oppressive to the Muslim world, the easier it is to convert Muslims to violent radicalism, and (2) the most potent weapon for undermining Islamic extremism is the efforts of Westerners to work against their own governments' belligerent policies.
MORE on terrorism
MORE on terrorism
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Friday, November 13, 2009
General Stubblebine: "it was not an airplane" that hit the Pentagon on 9/11
VIDEO: "I don't know exactly what hit it, but I do know, from the photographs that I have analyzed and looked at very, very carefully, it was not an airplane." — Major General Albert Stubblebine
General Stubblebine was responsible for the U.S. Army's strategic intelligence forces around the world — Signals Intelligence, Photo Intelligence, Counter Intelligence, Human Intelligence.
General Stubblebine was responsible for the U.S. Army's strategic intelligence forces around the world — Signals Intelligence, Photo Intelligence, Counter Intelligence, Human Intelligence.
9/11 trials: will justice be served?
Watch this video, broadcast to 20+ countries, and see if the 9/11 trials will be just — if that still matters.
Skip the 6 minute introduction if you're pressed for time.
The featured speaker, Enver Masud, may be contacted at 567-703-6837, and staff@twf.org.
Skip the 6 minute introduction if you're pressed for time.
The featured speaker, Enver Masud, may be contacted at 567-703-6837, and staff@twf.org.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Feds move to seize 4 mosques, tower linked to Iran
Federal prosecutors took steps Thursday to seize four U.S. mosques and a Fifth Avenue skyscraper owned by a nonprofit Muslim organization long suspected of being secretly controlled by the Iranian government. . . .
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Why home-grown Islamic terrorism isn't a threat
America's free and prosperous Muslim population remains our most effective deterrent against Islamic terrorism. Al-Qaeda can recruit among the angry and desperately poor Muslims of Spain, or it can incite violence against the hijab-banning French, but it has difficulty convincing comfortably middle-class small-business owners to declare jihad on America. It's important that the United States avoid the pitfalls of Europe and not alienate or restrict its Muslim population. To do so would more than just risk our greatest anti-terrorism weapon; it would threaten to incite the very violence we seek to quell.
Alleged Fort Hood shooter frequented local strip club
The Army psychiatrist authorities say killed 13 people and wounded 29 others at the Fort Hood Army Base Thursday was a recent and frequent customer at a local strip club, employees of the club told FoxNews.com exclusively.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
Re Take a look at Hasan's old mosque
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz
Center for Islamic Pluralism
1718 M Street NW #260
Washington, DC 20036 USA
You write (New York Post, November 7): "Yet what docrines did Hasan absorb at the mosque? While he was a communicant, it hosted at least four talks by Enver Masud, the founder of The Wisdom Fund, the main Muslim "truther" group in America."
The Wisdom Fund was established as a nonprofit corporation in 1995 — long before 9/11. The primary purpose for its founding was to disseminate "The Truth About Islam" (attached) that has been published in Foreign Affairs, The Brown Journal of World Affairs, Washington Report On Middle East Affairs, Teacher Magazine, The Washington Times, Islamic Horizons, etc., and displayed in Washington Metrorail.
Regarding my views on 9/11, perhaps you should read "9/11 Unveiled". The 9/11 Commission Report" is fatally flawed. Hundreds of patriotic Americans agree with me, I am honored to be in their company, and I challenge anyone to debate me on this issue.
Those who uncritically accept the Commission's report are contributing to the death of thousands, the squandering of US resources, and our current financial crisis.
Perhaps you should seek the relevant facts before you take a position on my talks and/or The Wisdom Fund. Did not Prophet Muhammad say: "Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave." Are you as intolerant as the Wahabbis that you denouce?
Enver Masud
The Wisdom Fund
ps More on Schwartz.
Center for Islamic Pluralism
1718 M Street NW #260
Washington, DC 20036 USA
You write (New York Post, November 7): "Yet what docrines did Hasan absorb at the mosque? While he was a communicant, it hosted at least four talks by Enver Masud, the founder of The Wisdom Fund, the main Muslim "truther" group in America."
The Wisdom Fund was established as a nonprofit corporation in 1995 — long before 9/11. The primary purpose for its founding was to disseminate "The Truth About Islam" (attached) that has been published in Foreign Affairs, The Brown Journal of World Affairs, Washington Report On Middle East Affairs, Teacher Magazine, The Washington Times, Islamic Horizons, etc., and displayed in Washington Metrorail.
Regarding my views on 9/11, perhaps you should read "9/11 Unveiled". The 9/11 Commission Report" is fatally flawed. Hundreds of patriotic Americans agree with me, I am honored to be in their company, and I challenge anyone to debate me on this issue.
Those who uncritically accept the Commission's report are contributing to the death of thousands, the squandering of US resources, and our current financial crisis.
Perhaps you should seek the relevant facts before you take a position on my talks and/or The Wisdom Fund. Did not Prophet Muhammad say: "Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave." Are you as intolerant as the Wahabbis that you denouce?
Enver Masud
The Wisdom Fund
ps More on Schwartz.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
Ft Hood and Islam?
If one attributes the shooting in Ft Hood to Islam, to what should one attribute the deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Read this and decide.
Read this and decide.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Why would Muslim 'insurgents' kidnap Beverley Giesbrecht — aka Bruce Kennedy, Bev Kennedy, Paul Morris-Read, Khadija Abdul Qahaar?
Brian Hutchinson of the National Post asks, "Why would insurgents kidnap a Muslim woman notorious for collecting and disseminating pro-terrorist, anti-Western propaganda"? It could be because there's more to Ms. Giesbrecht than we're being told.
I first communicated with Ms. Geisbrect on August 21, 2003. Our email exchanges did not resolve her identity. Just who is Beverley Giesbrecht, aka Bruce Kennedy, Bev Kennedy, Paul Morris-Read, Khadija Abdul Qahaar? Perhaps this is why she's being held captive.
I first communicated with Ms. Geisbrect on August 21, 2003. Our email exchanges did not resolve her identity. Just who is Beverley Giesbrecht, aka Bruce Kennedy, Bev Kennedy, Paul Morris-Read, Khadija Abdul Qahaar? Perhaps this is why she's being held captive.
Monday, November 2, 2009
NATO troops involved in drug trafficking
Afghan Minister of Counter-Narcotics, General Khodaidad Khodaidad, has brought into public debate Afghanistan's best-kept secret: the role of foreign troops in drug trafficking.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) contingents from the US, Britain and Canada are "taxing" the production of opium in the regions under their control.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) contingents from the US, Britain and Canada are "taxing" the production of opium in the regions under their control.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)